Not true! I wear skirts that come up to just above to knees. I still cross my legs when I sit down because when I sit down, the skirt goes up a little. If I didn't cross my legs, then I would be creating an awkward situation for myself. I wouldn't call that kind of skirt revealing.

Now, I by no means want to talk you out of wearing that skirt (or especially not shorter ones you may have), but ML is right on this one -- if the clothes you wear, require a restircted movement to prevent them from being revealing, then just because you restrict your movement, it doesn't mean that the skirt isn't still revealing -- you're just preventing it from doing that; moral of the story: wear shorter skirts, and quit crossing your legs when you sit down please.

A skirt that reveals your crotch is revealing by definition. There's nothing else left to reveal! Whether or not you feel that is "too revealing" is your opinion. But if a visible crotch isn't revealing, then there really is no point in even putting on a skirt.

Have any of your friends been raped? I doubt it, if you're making a ridiculous statement like that. I know that you're not saying that you condone it, but seriously.

That was mostly just an offensive, controversial, and ignorant way of saying I disagree with dressing that skimpy. I may still feel sympathy, but I also may not.

Kwame Alexander said:

Should someone who gets mugged because he wore expensive-looking clothing receive no sympathy? I mean, by wearing a nice suit, you're pretty much asking for it, right?

Yes and no. If you think about it dressing sexy is advertising sex. Dressing expensive is advertising money. People that can't get those by other means may be driven to get them in other ways so by advertising that you've got it you're probably increasing the odds of being a victim.

I don't think I would dress expensively even if I had a lot of money. I would wear the best of what was comfortable, but nothing like watches, rings, or bling...

wearetheborg said:

I say we might as well run around nekked. Clothing is just way too revealing these days!!!

Women's clothing, yeah. You gotta get through a minimum of two layers on me.

At least you're willing to admit what you said was ignorant. There are still too many guys out there who really do think that a woman who knows she looks good and is willing to show it is just trying to say "come here and take me guys."

No, this comment is: "Note that if a women gets raped wearing something like that I have no sympathy."

Oh lay off him you dicks, so what if he has no sympathy, that's his business, Jesus!

Quote:

BTW, I have a female friend who was raped once. She'd like to meet you.

What the fuck for? He wouldn't have any sympathy for the bitch -- hell why should any of us have sympathy for some girl we never met? "She got raped" -- that doesn't tell us anything. I know people who've been raped and I'm close to them, yeah I feel sympathy for 'em. If bamccaig's sister was raped and he didn't completely hate her (hey, what are sisters for, right?) he'd feel sympathy too -- what the fuck business is it of yours who he or anybody else has sympathy for? Sympathy is worthless anyway unless it makes you do something, and to my knowledge, bamccaig does not possess the ability to un-rape someone, though he might feel bad enough not to rape her a second time if he was so inclined in the first place.

Yes and no. If you think about it dressing sexy is advertising sex. Dressing expensive is advertising money. People that can't get those by other means may be driven to get them in other ways so by advertising that you've got it you're probably increasing the odds of being a victim.

Muggings are almost always about money, but a lot a rapes aren't about sex. They're about power. So advertising sex isn't asking for rape. No man who has at least one good hand has to rape someone if he's horny and can't get any.

I think that everyone involved in this train wreck (myself included) knows just what everyone else involved feels about the subject (be it the skimpy clothing this thread was supposed to be about or attitudes about rape, which this became) May I suggest that we pull the plug and give this thread the two weeks or so it requires to die, to avoid any more bad feelings among the allegro.cc members.

I find what he said to be reprehensible, but I'm letting it go, as there's not really anything further to say. It doesn't appear that anyone's opinion is being changed by this discussion, so it strikes me as a waste of disk space.

No, this comment is: "Note that if a women gets raped wearing something like that I have no sympathy."

i understand what he is trying to say but it is a bad example. he is talking about the people that put them selfs into trouble and what the out come will be but they was to do it anyway. example awhile a go there where some people that where studying bears in the hill. later it was found out that one of the bears had killed them. see they knew what could happen but they did it away.

example #2 a that where no under-ware at a club. she knows full well what type of attention it will bring but she dose it away.

theses type of people that like (cant think of what to call it you all get my point)

girls where reviling out-fit to attract guys do you think she is trying to attract a shy guy or a agrasive guy.

i knew a girl in at pg college that was into that rape stuff and she was trying to get me to be apart of it.